Legal Opinion

Rosenstock v. Tormey

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided February 25, 1870PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court. In the course of the trial, the following exceptions were taken to the evidence and order of evidence: First Exception: After the plaintiff had proved the order to purchase the stock in question ; its purchase in Yew York, according to the regular course of business; the items in the account filed with the declaration, with the credits thereon, See., and the…

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court. In the course of the trial, the following exceptions were taken to the evidence and order of evidence: First Exception: After the plaintiff had proved the order to purchase the stock in question ; its purchase in Yew York, according to the regular course of business; the items in the account filed with the declaration, with the credits thereon, See., and the payment by the plaintiff of $12,850 to Dibble and Cambloss, as the purchase money of the stock, the defendants objected to the…

1Opinion of the CourtMiller, J.

This action was brought by the appellee, against the appellant and Louis Rosenstoek and Jacob Hoflin jointly. The latter was returned non est, and the case proceeded against the other two. The declaration contains the common counts in assumpsit, to which the general issue was pleaded. The cause of action, according to the testimony offered by the plaintiff, arose thus: The plaintiff' ivas a stock broker, doing business in the city of Baltimore, and on the 4th of October, 1866, Nathan Hoflin, who, for some time, had been dealing with him in a similar way, under the name of J. Hoflin, came to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Marshall v. HaneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1853
  2. Maryland Fire Insurance v. DalrympleCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1866
  3. Atwell v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1857

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Bluthenthal & Bickart v. May Advertising Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1915
  2. National Mechanics' Bank v. National BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1872
  3. Durkee v. CarrOregon Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Dearholt Motor Sales Co. v. MerrittCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1918
  5. Fifer v. Clearfield & Cambria Coal & Coke Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1906

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API